saddened The Times, the Guardian and the Telegraph still have a far greater depth of news stories than most other news sources, as well as opinion and comment, that is the main reason to buy them
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
In the case of the SNP the apparent reliance on one eyed and partisan blogs for "the truth" led to delusions and a belief that they were winning when they were not. I think we see a similar phenomenon with UKIP. That is not to say that these blogs do not have influence, at least in motivating the converted. The irony is that the "free" internet is resulting in more people getting their news from partisan, blinkered and downright false sources than ever before. It is a real challenge for the politicians.
LOL, David you just cannot believe that the SNP are running the country and likely to be even more in command, are very popular and after more than 7 years in power getting even more popular. It is Tories like yourself that are deluded , again the SNP are running the country, and people do not get taken in by the Tory lying press. Get a grip for goodness sake.
The SNP are now booming because their most unpopular policy, independence, is now off the agenda for the foreseeable future. A paradox.
I see you are leading from behind as ever Monica, is that the view from Swindon.
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
No individual, in their right mind would choose to pay extra tax than is legally necessary so why do we insist that companies act differently? Fine when people break the law prosecute to the full but all the rest is cant and rank hypocrisy. It's like blaming the banks when people borrow more than they can afford. We really need to get back to people taking responsibility for their actions.
The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like.
Morning Malky, nice sunny day ... but I have to agree with you, after wasting a great deal of time trying to work out what happened to the £2 back tax demand my father paid (and will now have paid a second time over).
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
Couldn't find references on BBC stories on Rotheham last week about its 'Labour' Council...
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
It does add something however, it confirms that Tories will do anything to help their chums, and are unprincipled lying toerags.
PS On your last point , it is unbridled greed assisted by compliant politicians
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
December 1979, warrants were issued for the arrest of both Lord Kagan and his wife. The warrants alleged conspiracy to defraud the public revenue and to falsify records.
When scientists use the raw data crirics complain that it is unreliable, when scientists use a subset that is shown to be sound critics claim it is cherry picked, when statistical methods are used to clean up the date to take into account known problems and issues then critics claim it is fiddled.
I remember a few years o when BEST was going to blow the whole AGW conspiracy wide open. Imagine the deniers utter disappointment when it came back saying AGW was happening
Notice Margaret Hodge being hypocritical on R4 this morning when condemning the non-prosecution of "tax dodgers" (her words). Of course the interviewer did not mention Stemcor and her own and familly association with that tax dodging company. Have written to my MP to get him to raise it in the House.
Perhaps Ed might have something to say about the tax arrangements of the owners of the Guardian too?
In the case of the SNP the apparent reliance on one eyed and partisan blogs for "the truth" led to delusions and a belief that they were winning when they were not. I think we see a similar phenomenon with UKIP. That is not to say that these blogs do not have influence, at least in motivating the converted. The irony is that the "free" internet is resulting in more people getting their news from partisan, blinkered and downright false sources than ever before. It is a real challenge for the politicians.
LOL, David you just cannot believe that the SNP are running the country and likely to be even more in command, are very popular and after more than 7 years in power getting even more popular. It is Tories like yourself that are deluded , again the SNP are running the country, and people do not get taken in by the Tory lying press. Get a grip for goodness sake.
The SNP are now booming because their most unpopular policy, independence, is now off the agenda for the foreseeable future. A paradox.
Given that the Ashcroft poll ing shows a strong correlation between Yes vote and SNP vote then that seems a very unlikely supposition.
Substantial fall in Guardian 38%, Independent 68%, Daily Record 37% - huge drop in Labour supporting papers...shouldn't that be the headline?
That should be the headline if the aim was mindless cheerleading for the blue team rather than trying to analyse what is happening now and predict what will happen on Thursday, 7 May 2015.
There is no question that the press does not have the influence it did in most respects but they still get inordinate attention from the 24 hour news channels, not just in their press reviews but in their story lines and talking heads. It may be an indirect and more fragmented influence but it is still there.
Yes, for all the talk of BBC "bias" the BBC mostly takes its editorial lead from the press, and mostly from the Mail (which is understandable given its market-leading position).
The BBC editorials are mist heavily influenced by the Guardian and Independent. Like too many others they sneer at the Mail and its millions of followers.
It raises a sardonic smile whenever a paper with an "awkward" front page never even makes it onto their review of the papers. The notion of Non-persons is alive and well at the Beeb...
Like the Muslim demo in whitehall yesterday, that for the BBC, just didn't exist.
The irony is its organisers will be complaining about being ignored by the same media which proves to their supporters they were right about the anti-muslim bias.
"Like the Muslim demo in whitehall yesterday, that for the BBC, just didn't exist."
If every gathering of twenty people and four banners is to be a BBC news story they'd need a bigger staff than the NHS
Just showing yourself up as a one eyed liar now.. There were hundreds possibly over a thousand people there demonstrating as the photos and video in this article show
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
Just sheer naked greed Charles I am afraid.
Poor man wanna be rich Rich man wanna be King, But the King ain't satisfied until he rules everything.
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
December 1979, warrants were issued for the arrest of both Lord Kagan and his wife. The warrants alleged conspiracy to defraud the public revenue and to falsify records.
...and don't forget John Stonehouse MP. Those were the days!
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
It is surprising that the adjustments would create the trend.
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
Just sheer naked greed Charles I am afraid.
Poor man wanna be rich Rich man wanna be King, But the King ain't satisfied until he rules everything.
Bruce Springsteen 1978
Puts up the closed sign does the man in the corner shop Serves his last then he says goodbye to him He knows it is a hard life But its nice to be your own boss really
Walks off home does the last customer He is jealous of the man in the corner shop He is sick of working at the factory Says it must be nice to be your own boss (really)
Sells cigars to the boss from the factory He is jealous is the man in the corner shop He is sick of struggling so hard Says it must be nice to own a factory
I was musing on political correctness the other day and wondered if I meet an unrepresentative bunch of people.
I find that generally the young and/or posh/well-off and/or liberal and/or Metropolitan tend to be PC. The old and/or poor and/or Muslim tend to be politically incorrect. The latter group definitely anti-semitic and homophobic,
I don't claim to meet a representative group of any of them.
But if I'm correct (a big assumption), then it would be likely that many places would have problems like Rotherham with PC. The upper echelons would be where the blind eye was turned.
So a young teacher turned Labour/LD MP living in London would be guaranteed to be so.
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
"As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about."
Greed. Mixed with a bit of the 'masters of the universe' stuff which polished their egos. A pretty ugly combination
Twitter is a stronger driver of big stories than the newspapers, with individual journalists in many cases having more influence than the newspapers for which they write. No one would notice much if the Independent disappeared, but if John Rentoul's voice fell silent, that would be a gap.
The newspapers' remaining audience is much older than the UK average, but that means that they remain disproportionately important for politicians, because that's who most of the voters are. They will be particularly important for the Conservatives and UKIP, as they fight over the paleo vote. The Mail and the Telegraph in particular can still shift votes in these columns.
For this reason Ed Miliband is wrong if he thinks that he can ignore the papers. If they decide that he's public enemy number one, they could yet cause a rallying around the Conservative flag among those that might otherwise be divided.
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
HOLY SHIT
you mean it's not Thatcher ?
Get to the back of the demo Roger, you've lost your lefty moral compass.
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
I see that Labour's response to accusations of being anti-business is to promise a doubling of paternity leave. I'm sure that will silence the doubters.
I see that Labour's response to accusations of being anti-business is to promise a doubling of paternity leave. I'm sure that will silence the doubters.
For the good of the Labour crusade, Justine should embark on a breeding frenzy.
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
December 1979, warrants were issued for the arrest of both Lord Kagan and his wife. The warrants alleged conspiracy to defraud the public revenue and to falsify records.
...and don't forget John Stonehouse MP. Those were the days!
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
Couldn't find references on BBC stories on Rotheham last week about its 'Labour' Council...
True, there were several main news broadcasts on BBC1 that did not inform viewers this was a Labour run Council. Under BBC impartiality rules all mentions of a Conservative link to a negative news story must be included whereas it is at the editor's discretion whether any negative stories that may have a link to the Labour party are included. Unfortunately at CCHQ Shapps/Feldman are too useless to grasp this.
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
5 seconds with google gets you hundreds of links.
Post them then - you made the claim - you stand it up.
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
Of course there's no conspiracy. Science is the antidote for conspiracy, as you say peer reviewing roots out any myopia. Shame there isn't peer reviewing for politics.
I was musing on political correctness the other day and wondered if I meet an unrepresentative bunch of people.
I find that generally the young and/or posh/well-off and/or liberal and/or Metropolitan tend to be PC. The old and/or poor and/or Muslim tend to be politically incorrect. The latter group definitely anti-semitic and homophobic,
I don't claim to meet a representative group of any of them.
But if I'm correct (a big assumption), then it would be likely that many places would have problems like Rotherham with PC. The upper echelons would be where the blind eye was turned.
So a young teacher turned Labour/LD MP living in London would be guaranteed to be so.
Aren't stereotypes great?
Yes, you do meet an unrepresentative bunch of people. Everyone does. We live around people who think like us and who have similar incomes and lifestyles, who shop at the same supermarkets, vote the same way (hence safe seats) and support the same football team, and we work with people in the same industry as ourselves.
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
5 seconds with google gets you hundreds of links.
I always thought any transfer pricing had to be done at an "arm's length" ?
"The UK legislation allows only for a transfer pricing adjustment to increase taxable profits or reduce a tax loss. It is not possible to decrease profits or increase a tax loss."
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
5 seconds with google gets you hundreds of links.
Post them then - you made the claim - you stand it up.
OOOOOOOOOOH Matron, are you running the site nowadays then
"I see that Labour's response to accusations of being anti-business is to promise a doubling of paternity leave. I'm sure that will silence the doubters."
Hmmmm. I thought he was on to something. The start of a Labour narrative..... media MOGULS.....MONACO based tax AVOIDERS..........and It all seemed to be going so well
........then I woke this morning to hear Rachel Reeves ......years and years of PATERNITY leave! I thought I was dreaming.....
Hmm ... not so sure about that. Ideas do get fixed and that's where the papers come from. It takes a lot to reverse the trend of scientific thought - think of an oil tanker.
New ideas/theories (hate the word paradigm) often struggle for a foothold. Peer reviewing helps to root out incompetence and sloppy science but that's about all.
"The BBC editorials are mist heavily influenced by the Guardian and Independent. Like too many others they sneer at the Mail and its millions of followers."
.....and the Times and the Telegraph. The BBC are a serious news organization which is fast moving. Of course it can't use stories in the Sun and Mail and the Mirror which are almost certainly sensationalized and usually slanted because that's the nature of red tops and tabloids. It is not part of the BBC remit to publish stories just because a large readership newspaper publishes them
Oh dear roger
"the BBC has learnt" = We see another news outlet has found some actual news but we can't admit that .
"Like the Muslim demo in whitehall yesterday, that for the BBC, just didn't exist."
If every gathering of twenty people and four banners is to be a BBC news story they'd need a bigger staff than the NHS
Poor @Roger, you continue to be PB's most idiotic Ostrich. You bury your head under your quilt and say what comes first into your bird-brain. That demonstration was attended by over a thousand muslims, many of their banners threatened non-muslims with physical violence.
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
Of course there's no conspiracy. Science is the antidote for conspiracy, as you say peer reviewing roots out any myopia. Shame there isn't peer reviewing for politics.
In science or business a theory or a business model is tried out, tested, works or doesn't work and knowledge and understanding evolve. In politics we don't seem to see a willingness to try different approaches or to learn from past mistakes. And I think the reason for that is not that politiicans are stupid but they want to get (re)elected and a brutal honesty, a doing what's right for the country, may not translate to personal objectives or unevolving ideology. How else are we to explain Ed's abject ignorance of how an economy works? Or some of Dave's manifest weak spots.
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
HOLY SHIT
you mean it's not Thatcher ?
Get to the back of the demo Roger, you've lost your lefty moral compass.
Harold Macmillan, perhaps? I've always though Ernest Marples' life would make a good drama -- he had a huge and lasting influence on our lives: he gave us premium bonds and postcodes, and motorways and the Beeching cuts. He was also giving his own company building contracts, and consorting widely with prostitutes (and was probably the man in the mask in the Profumo affair). Then he fled abroad to avoid prosecution for fraud.
"Just showing yourself up as a one eyed liar now.. There were hundreds possibly over a thousand people there demonstrating as the photos and video in this article show"
Do you think that's a story? A group of people that you'd find at a Sunday village cricket match saying they don't agree with Charlie?
So, here's your opportunity to condemn the left-wing Mirror Group for doing what right-wing Newscorp was doing on phone hacking.
A chance to be a bigger man than Ed Miliband.
I utterly condemn the British press of whatever political persuasion snooping on a free people via their mobile phones. Justice is coming.
My laugh was at the dwindling power of the rightwing press. You can see it with the almost twin leader articles in the Telegraph and Sun on Saturday morning.
Having done so much to give birth and succour to the UKIP movement, here were two newspapers realising far too late that it has meant a fratcuring of the rump of voters believing in their wrongheaded version of the world, and therefore weakening, probably terminally, their ability to get the Tories elected as a majority administration.
"The issue is these tossers allow their chums to "avoid " tax by not fixing the rules properly. They are happy to assist their chums accountants get round their pathetic legislation but are far more diligent on PAYE and on benefit claimants. It is the rank hypocrisy and assistance of one section of society that people do not like."
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
HOLY SHIT
you mean it's not Thatcher ?
Get to the back of the demo Roger, you've lost your lefty moral compass.
Harold Macmillan, perhaps? I've always though Ernest Marples' life would make a good drama -- he had a huge and lasting influence on our lives: he gave us premium bonds and postcodes, and motorways and the Beeching cuts. He was also giving his own company building contracts, and consorting widely with prostitutes (and was probably the man in the mask in the Profumo affair). Then he fled abroad to avoid prosecution for fraud.
There was for many years a piece of graffiti on an M1 flyover with the words, 'Marples Must Go'.
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
It does add something however, it confirms that Tories will do anything to help their chums, and are unprincipled lying toerags.
PS On your last point , it is unbridled greed assisted by compliant politicians
It's been under the Coalition that HMRC has pursued them - I suspect a lot of settlements rather than prosecutions because tax evaders, by nature, have money: if someone will cough up the full amount owed, plus interest, plus penalties there is little upside in prosecuting them.
On the unbridled greed: I suspect human nature hasn't changed that much! But perhaps it has. If so, not for the better
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
Of course there's no conspiracy. Science is the antidote for conspiracy, as you say peer reviewing roots out any myopia. Shame there isn't peer reviewing for politics.
In science or business a theory or a business model is tried out, tested, works or doesn't work and knowledge and understanding evolve. In politics we don't seem to see a willingness to try different approaches or to learn from past mistakes. And I think the reason for that is not that politiicans are stupid but they want to get (re)elected and a brutal honesty, a doing what's right for the country, may not translate to personal objectives or unevolving ideology. How else are we to explain Ed's abject ignorance of how an economy works? Or some of Dave's manifest weak spots.
Politics has no chance of becoming an iterative process, because the electorate may not have the opportunity for the next iteration for as long as five years. In the extreme example of my ninety-four year old Grandad, who was first eligible to vote in the general election of 1945, he has only been able to vote in 18 general elections. Most people will not live for so long.
If we had annual Parliaments then the electorate would have more opportunity to learn from their mistakes.
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
Just sheer naked greed Charles I am afraid.
Poor man wanna be rich Rich man wanna be King, But the King ain't satisfied until he rules everything.
Bruce Springsteen 1978
Puts up the closed sign does the man in the corner shop Serves his last then he says goodbye to him He knows it is a hard life But its nice to be your own boss really
Walks off home does the last customer He is jealous of the man in the corner shop He is sick of working at the factory Says it must be nice to be your own boss (really)
Sells cigars to the boss from the factory He is jealous is the man in the corner shop He is sick of struggling so hard Says it must be nice to own a factory
Paul Weller 1980
There's a man I meet Walks up our street He's a worker for the council Has been twenty years And he takes no lip off nobody And litter off the gutter Puts it in a bag And never thinks to mutter And he packs his lunch in a Sunblest bag The children call him Bogie He never lets on But I know 'cause he once told me He let me know a secret About the money in his kitty He's gonna buy a dinghy Gonna call her Dignity
And I'll sail her up the west coast Through villages and towns I'll be on my holidays They'll be doing their rounds They'll ask me how I got her I'll say I saved my money They'll say isn't she pretty That ship called Dignity
"As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about."
Greed. Mixed with a bit of the 'masters of the universe' stuff which polished their egos. A pretty ugly combination
But that's the point: the finance industry has always been like that (with a few exceptions, the concept of service disappeared a long time ago: there's a reasons why "where are all the customers' yachts?" is a cliche)
But they never behaved like this: what has changed?
With The Telegraph, you can set Chrome so it doesn't allow The Telegraph to store cookies... and therefore never need to delete them
Allegedly.
I paid the £20 when Plato was spamming pb with Telegraph links but the site seemed unwilling to accept my renewal. It does not seem worth the hassle now.
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
It does add something however, it confirms that Tories will do anything to help their chums, and are unprincipled lying toerags.
PS On your last point , it is unbridled greed assisted by compliant politicians
It's been under the Coalition that HMRC has pursued them - I suspect a lot of settlements rather than prosecutions because tax evaders, by nature, have money: if someone will cough up the full amount owed, plus interest, plus penalties there is little upside in prosecuting them.
On the unbridled greed: I suspect human nature hasn't changed that much! But perhaps it has. If so, not for the better
I'm not sure that cost-benefit analysis is correct. If a few very wealthy people suffer public odium, criminal penalties and exclusion from polite society, it may make tax evasion seem considerably less attractive to others who might contemplate the idea. Short term cost may well lead to long term gain.
If HSBC have been aiding and abetting criminal offences, then they need to have the book thrown at them.
I have posted that article before but I still find it shocking that the bank still has a licence.
I didn't get the impression that anyone was coming out of this story with any credit. The Tories have counter attacked with Balls and what he did or failed to do in 2007 and that has certainly muddied the waters somewhat but the apparent failure to act on the 2011 agreement in terms of prosecutions is disappointing.
AIUI the deal with Switzerland was that no one was to be prosecuted on the basis of the information they provided alone. But the HSBC customers info had already been leaked in 2007 so they should not have been subject to that exclusion.
So we have 1000 people evading tax on a big enough scale to make it worth all this absurd hassle and 1 has been prosecuted. I would welcome any explanation or clarification Cyclefree is able to provide as to why that might be the case. I understand she knows far more about this than most of us.
The perception of one rule for the rich and one for the poor on benefits here is palpable, real and frankly irresistible. If even 100 of that 1000 had spent time in custody for their crimes this might have been avoided. And future conduct just might have been influenced.
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
Of course there's no conspiracy. Science is the antidote for conspiracy, as you say peer reviewing roots out any myopia. Shame there isn't peer reviewing for politics.
In science or business a theory or a business model is tried out, tested, works or doesn't work and knowledge and understanding evolve. In politics we don't seem to see a willingness to try different approaches or to learn from past mistakes. And I think the reason for that is not that politiicans are stupid but they want to get (re)elected and a brutal honesty, a doing what's right for the country, may not translate to personal objectives or unevolving ideology. How else are we to explain Ed's abject ignorance of how an economy works? Or some of Dave's manifest weak spots.
OK, so politics is a lost cause. I just hope the MikeK and other Climate Change Deniers come to realise that the scientific method is aimed at finding out the truth. There will be mistakes made by individual scientists but peer reviewing will find these out. Science unlike politics isn't really something where you can simply rely on belief or opinion.
So, here's your opportunity to condemn the left-wing Mirror Group for doing what right-wing Newscorp was doing on phone hacking.
A chance to be a bigger man than Ed Miliband.
I utterly condemn the British press of whatever political persuasion snooping on a free people via their mobile phones. Justice is coming.
My laugh was at the dwindling power of the rightwing press. You can see it with the almost twin leader articles in the Telegraph and Sun on Saturday morning.
Having done so much to give birth and succour to the UKIP movement, here were two newspapers realising far too late that it has meant a fratcuring of the rump of voters believing in their wrongheaded version of the world, and therefore weakening, probably terminally, their ability to get the Tories elected as a majority administration.
So, here's your opportunity to condemn the left-wing Mirror Group for doing what right-wing Newscorp was doing on phone hacking.
A chance to be a bigger man than Ed Miliband.
I utterly condemn the British press of whatever political persuasion snooping on a free people via their mobile phones. Justice is coming.
My laugh was at the dwindling power of the rightwing press. You can see it with the almost twin leader articles in the Telegraph and Sun on Saturday morning.
Having done so much to give birth and succour to the UKIP movement, here were two newspapers realising far too late that it has meant a fratcuring of the rump of voters believing in their wrongheaded version of the world, and therefore weakening, probably terminally, their ability to get the Tories elected as a majority administration.
Kudos to you for condemning all papers for phone hacking. I suspect yours will be a rather solitary voice on the left....
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
Of course there's no conspiracy. Science is the antidote for conspiracy, as you say peer reviewing roots out any myopia. Shame there isn't peer reviewing for politics.
In science or business a theory or a business model is tried out, tested, works or doesn't work and knowledge and understanding evolve. In politics we don't seem to see a willingness to try different approaches or to learn from past mistakes. And I think the reason for that is not that politiicans are stupid but they want to get (re)elected and a brutal honesty, a doing what's right for the country, may not translate to personal objectives or unevolving ideology. How else are we to explain Ed's abject ignorance of how an economy works? Or some of Dave's manifest weak spots.
Politics has no chance of becoming an iterative process, because the electorate may not have the opportunity for the next iteration for as long as five years. In the extreme example of my ninety-four year old Grandad, who was first eligible to vote in the general election of 1945, he has only been able to vote in 18 general elections. Most people will not live for so long.
If we had annual Parliaments then the electorate would have more opportunity to learn from their mistakes.
Or maybe it is simply that the sort of people who stand for election are the ones already convinced they know best.
@SophyRidgeSky: Seems men would receive more paternity pay (£260 a week) under Labour plans than women receive after first 6 weeks https://t.co/YsGJtwPQXn
I think we saw from El Gord (and possibly William Hague?) that there's only so abuse that can be heaped on a politician before the public becomes immune to it all.
The other point is that Ed is already wildly unpopular (OGH seems to be just about the only person in the country that wants to see Ed Miliband become Prime Minister) so I guess there's a limit to how unpopular he can get (in Opposition)
Re Paternity leave. A really stupid policy. It alienates very small businesses and reminds voters how fiddly Labour governments can be. Very disappointing
As so often, antifrank has hit the nail firmly on the head. Of those who might be influenced by the dead-tree press, the key voter segment in the coming election is that of Conservative defectors to UKIP. They are very likely to be Telegraph and Mail readers.
Could people explain the mechanism by which stemcor is supposed to have avoided tax? I thought it was simply writing off previous years losses against current profit.
They use "transfer pricing" - something Hodge pilloried Starbucks for doing:
There are two issues with Ms Hodge: Stemcor and its tax affairs and the family trust from which she and her family benefits, set up by her father.
So there is no evidence they use transfer pricing in the way Amazon, Apple or Starbucks do then?
That was a piece of dreadful innuendo by C4.
There is no evidence that Amazon, Apple or Starbucks use transfer pricing in a different way from Stemcor.
It's a legal practice.
If Ms Hodges objects to it, she should change the law.
Are you being serious? Starbucks UK massiively overpays for its coffee from the Dutch based Starbucks roaster. Apple UK pays ludicrous charges to 'use' Apple intellectual property, liscensed from a Caribbean registered subsidiary..
Links to all those claims please - you wouldn't want to get OGH in trouble with their respective lawyers.....
5 seconds with google gets you hundreds of links.
Post them then - you made the claim - you stand it up.
OOOOOOOOOOH Matron, are you running the site nowadays then
Preferable to having the Moderator remove comments which are potentially libellous, doncha think?
I see that Labour's response to accusations of being anti-business is to promise a doubling of paternity leave. I'm sure that will silence the doubters.
For the good of the Labour crusade, Justine should embark on a breeding frenzy.
Best not, Ed probably to busy to get his name put on the birth certificate.
@SophyRidgeSky: Seems men would receive more paternity pay (£260 a week) under Labour plans than women receive after first 6 weeks https://t.co/YsGJtwPQXn
...after 6 weeks.
Before that women receive 90% of Average Weekly Earnings.
With The Telegraph, you can set Chrome so it doesn't allow The Telegraph to store cookies... and therefore never need to delete them
Allegedly.
I paid the £20 when Plato was spamming pb with Telegraph links but the site seemed unwilling to accept my renewal. It does not seem worth the hassle now.
On the rare occasions when The Times has an exclusive piece I want to read, I use my local library's subscription to a newspaper archive.
Typically you just have to follow a link from the library's website, and then use your library card number to log in to the archive's website.
If there are errors in the data you would expect scientists to adjust the data to correct for those errors.
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
There may not be a conspiracy but it is well-known that scientists will selectively use or promote data that fits their pet theory or expectation.
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
Scientists are humans too!
Thus they also suffer, as individuals, from well-known psychological biases, such as confirmation bias. Even peer review itself is not a perfect defence, and you will find that papers get published that do not stand the test of time. That is the true test.
If a paper says something new and interesting then it will lead to other scientists trying to build on that work, replicate it or test it from a different angle. One of two things then happens to the paper. It may be found to be contradicted by further work, generating a bit of [relative] excitement in a few conferences, to then be largely forgotten. Or, it will become the Ur-paper of a new micro-branch of its area of science. The paper that all other subsequent papers in that area reference.
One of the frustrating things is that negative results are very hard to get published. So, for example, I tried to apply an analysis method used for one purpose for another closely related purpose - a step hinted at in the original paper, but not followed up on by any subsequent papers. After many months of frustrating work I was eventually forced to conclude that it was not going to work, but of course that meant I had no results to write up in a paper, and so no way to communicate to future scientists that following up on the hint is not worthwhile.
"But they never behaved like this: what has changed?"
Thatcher! (Alanbrooke take note). She encouraged greed and 'get rich quick' with her privatizations and lauding the unacceptable face of capitalism. Inviting the likes of Hanson into her inner circle. She even presided over the corruption of lawyers once as respected as doctors. Now the only professions that have remained unscathed are ones in the public services
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
It does add something however, it confirms that Tories will do anything to help their chums, and are unprincipled lying toerags.
PS On your last point , it is unbridled greed assisted by compliant politicians
It's been under the Coalition that HMRC has pursued them - I suspect a lot of settlements rather than prosecutions because tax evaders, by nature, have money: if someone will cough up the full amount owed, plus interest, plus penalties there is little upside in prosecuting them.
On the unbridled greed: I suspect human nature hasn't changed that much! But perhaps it has. If so, not for the better
I'm not sure that cost-benefit analysis is correct. If a few very wealthy people suffer public odium, criminal penalties and exclusion from polite society, it may make tax evasion seem considerably less attractive to others who might contemplate the idea. Short term cost may well lead to long term gain.
If HSBC have been aiding and abetting criminal offences, then they need to have the book thrown at them.
That's a fair point: I suspect the HMRC is incentivised on maximising proceeds, so we'd need to look at that
OK, so politics is a lost cause. I just hope the MikeK and other Climate Change Deniers come to realise that the scientific method is aimed at finding out the truth. There will be mistakes made by individual scientists but peer reviewing will find these out. Science unlike politics isn't really something where you can simply rely on belief or opinion.
Correct - so all the more worrying that the current argument seems to be "the science is settled" together with a figure of e.g. "97% of scientists". You don't vote on science, you make hypotheses and conduct experiments.
Also, appropriating the term "denier" to describe sceptics is utterly inappropriate, and smacks of a [nasty] PR campaign than an attempt to "find truth". It's politicising science, in a process sense.
I write all the above as someone who thinks that AGW is probably happening.
With The Telegraph, you can set Chrome so it doesn't allow The Telegraph to store cookies... and therefore never need to delete them
Allegedly.
I paid the £20 when Plato was spamming pb with Telegraph links but the site seemed unwilling to accept my renewal. It does not seem worth the hassle now.
The most important stats about climate change today.
@Andrew_ComRes: ATTENTION SINGLE MEN: Almost 1 in 4 women less likely to go on date w/someone who doesn't think climate change needs tackling #showthelove
@Andrew_ComRes: 26% of women less likely to marry someone who doesn't believe climate change needs tackling #showthelove
@bbcnickrobinson: What's new in HSBC story is bank aided & abetted tax evasion. Leak of data known in '07. Content known by taxman in '10. We learnt today
The most important stats about climate change today.
@Andrew_ComRes: ATTENTION SINGLE MEN: Almost 1 in 4 women less likely to go on date w/someone who doesn't think climate change needs tackling #showthelove
@Andrew_ComRes: 26% of women less likely to marry someone who doesn't believe climate change needs tackling #showthelove
Show me a man who's a vegan, and I'll show you a man who's trying to shag a vegan.
"But they never behaved like this: what has changed?"
Thatcher! (Alanbrooke take note). She encouraged greed and 'get rich quick' with her privatizations and lauding the unacceptable face of capitalism. Inviting the likes of Hanson into her inner circle. She even presided over the corruption of lawyers once as respected as doctors. Now the only professions that have remained unscathed are ones in the public services
The change happened in the mid 90s onwards, in my experience. In 1992 there were still a lot of people who thought it was somehow "wrong" to try to break the pound
Comments
Correct. One prosecuion from all the HSBC tax evaders. Benefit claimants are hauled through the courts on a daily basis.
Can any Prime Minister (with the possible exception of Blair) have had a more dodgy record of employing crooks than Cameron?
I found it interesting that the BBC found it added to the story to mention that Stephen Green, "now a Tory peer" was Chairman of HSBC at the time.
It doesn't add anything to the story - which is the (apparently) shameful behaviour of HSBC, but makes it an explicitly political attack
As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about.
PS On your last point , it is unbridled greed assisted by compliant politicians
Gannex macs and Joe Kagan's tax affairs look odd.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituaries-lord-kagan-1568684.html
December 1979, warrants were issued for the arrest of both Lord Kagan and his wife. The warrants alleged conspiracy to defraud the public revenue and to falsify records.
I remember a few years o when BEST was going to blow the whole AGW conspiracy wide open. Imagine the deniers utter disappointment when it came back saying AGW was happening
"Like the Muslim demo in whitehall yesterday, that for the BBC, just didn't exist."
If every gathering of twenty people and four banners is to be a BBC news story they'd need a bigger staff than the NHS
No? I wonder why not.......
http://www.jimmurphymp.com/news-room/Articles/news.aspx?p=1041297
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2944946/Thousands-British-Muslims-protest-against-Charlie-Hebdo-magazine-publishing-cartoons-Prophet-Mohammed.html
You just don't want to believe what doesn't fit your agenda
Poor man wanna be rich
Rich man wanna be King,
But the King ain't satisfied until he rules everything.
Bruce Springsteen 1978
It is plausible that most errors would involve recording temperatures that are too high, because they mostly tend to revolve around not protecting the thermometers from heating by the sun.
It is also not unreasonable to expect that observations are generally more accurate now, and so most adjustments will be made to historical data.
Thus it would not be surprising that adjustments will increase the historical trend.
There is no conspiracy.
Serves his last then he says goodbye to him
He knows it is a hard life
But its nice to be your own boss really
Walks off home does the last customer
He is jealous of the man in the corner shop
He is sick of working at the factory
Says it must be nice to be your own boss (really)
Sells cigars to the boss from the factory
He is jealous is the man in the corner shop
He is sick of struggling so hard
Says it must be nice to own a factory
Paul Weller 1980
I was musing on political correctness the other day and wondered if I meet an unrepresentative bunch of people.
I find that generally the young and/or posh/well-off and/or liberal and/or Metropolitan tend to be PC. The old and/or poor and/or Muslim tend to be politically incorrect. The latter group definitely anti-semitic and homophobic,
I don't claim to meet a representative group of any of them.
But if I'm correct (a big assumption), then it would be likely that many places would have problems like Rotherham with PC. The upper echelons would be where the blind eye was turned.
So a young teacher turned Labour/LD MP living in London would be guaranteed to be so.
Aren't stereotypes great?
That is why peer-reviewing is used. We do a lot of this and find that we reject many applications for funding due to the author(s) being somewhat myopic at times.
"As an aside, where the heck did it go wrong with my industry? So many people have been operating on the wrong side of the line, it's so depressing to think about."
Greed. Mixed with a bit of the 'masters of the universe' stuff which polished their egos. A pretty ugly combination
The newspapers' remaining audience is much older than the UK average, but that means that they remain disproportionately important for politicians, because that's who most of the voters are. They will be particularly important for the Conservatives and UKIP, as they fight over the paleo vote. The Mail and the Telegraph in particular can still shift votes in these columns.
For this reason Ed Miliband is wrong if he thinks that he can ignore the papers. If they decide that he's public enemy number one, they could yet cause a rallying around the Conservative flag among those that might otherwise be divided.
you mean it's not Thatcher ?
Get to the back of the demo Roger, you've lost your lefty moral compass.
heap affair - Millhench.
Quick summary here.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8u7obxZ7MawC&pg=PA226&lpg=PA226&dq=wilson+slag+heap&source=bl&ots=pe6gkqHW3J&sig=zWP3zyiPdLwkPO_6x5bCIZwmxw0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=o3vYVLWCK-KV7AbDyIDAAg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=wilson slag heap&f=false
Amusingly this is one going in the other direction. Paying bollocks fee for roasting patent between UK and Netherlands.
Reminder of How Britain Works: ex HMRC chief went to work for HSBC back in 2013 (he also went to advise Deloitte too) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270813/Former-UK-tax-chief-Dave-Harnett-lied-MPs-advise-HSBC-bank-honesty.html …
Nothing clever I have done that's for sure.
"The UK legislation allows only for a transfer pricing adjustment to increase taxable profits or reduce a tax loss. It is not possible to decrease profits or increase a tax loss."
The Telegraph @Telegraph 16m16 minutes ago
Attack of the robot vacuum cleaner: South Korean woman gets in a tangle with her domestic aid http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/11399713/Robot-vacuum-cleaner-attacks-South-Korea-housewifes-hair.html …
"I see that Labour's response to accusations of being anti-business is to promise a doubling of paternity leave. I'm sure that will silence the doubters."
Hmmmm. I thought he was on to something. The start of a Labour narrative..... media MOGULS.....MONACO based tax AVOIDERS..........and It all seemed to be going so well
........then I woke this morning to hear Rachel Reeves ......years and years of PATERNITY leave! I thought I was dreaming.....
I can't even imagine it's popular
"as you say peer reviewing roots out any myopia."
Hmm ... not so sure about that. Ideas do get fixed and that's where the papers come from. It takes a lot to reverse the trend of scientific thought - think of an oil tanker.
New ideas/theories (hate the word paradigm) often struggle for a foothold. Peer reviewing helps to root out incompetence and sloppy science but that's about all.
"the BBC has learnt" = We see another news outlet has found some actual news but we can't admit that .
Cheap crack I know....
A chance to be a bigger man than Ed Miliband.
With The Telegraph, you can set Chrome so it doesn't allow The Telegraph to store cookies... and therefore never need to delete them
Allegedly.
"Just showing yourself up as a one eyed liar now.. There were hundreds possibly over a thousand people there demonstrating as the photos and video in this article show"
Do you think that's a story? A group of people that you'd find at a Sunday village cricket match saying they don't agree with Charlie?
Get a grip!
My laugh was at the dwindling power of the rightwing press. You can see it with the almost twin leader articles in the Telegraph and Sun on Saturday morning.
Having done so much to give birth and succour to the UKIP movement, here were two newspapers realising far too late that it has meant a fratcuring of the rump of voters believing in their wrongheaded version of the world, and therefore weakening, probably terminally, their ability to get the Tories elected as a majority administration.
On the unbridled greed: I suspect human nature hasn't changed that much! But perhaps it has. If so, not for the better
If we had annual Parliaments then the electorate would have more opportunity to learn from their mistakes.
Walks up our street
He's a worker for the council
Has been twenty years
And he takes no lip off nobody
And litter off the gutter
Puts it in a bag
And never thinks to mutter
And he packs his lunch in a Sunblest bag
The children call him Bogie
He never lets on
But I know 'cause he once told me
He let me know a secret
About the money in his kitty
He's gonna buy a dinghy
Gonna call her Dignity
And I'll sail her up the west coast
Through villages and towns
I'll be on my holidays
They'll be doing their rounds
They'll ask me how I got her I'll say
I saved my money
They'll say isn't she pretty
That ship called Dignity
Deacon Blue
But they never behaved like this: what has changed?
If HSBC have been aiding and abetting criminal offences, then they need to have the book thrown at them.
I have posted that article before but I still find it shocking that the bank still has a licence.
I didn't get the impression that anyone was coming out of this story with any credit. The Tories have counter attacked with Balls and what he did or failed to do in 2007 and that has certainly muddied the waters somewhat but the apparent failure to act on the 2011 agreement in terms of prosecutions is disappointing.
AIUI the deal with Switzerland was that no one was to be prosecuted on the basis of the information they provided alone. But the HSBC customers info had already been leaked in 2007 so they should not have been subject to that exclusion.
So we have 1000 people evading tax on a big enough scale to make it worth all this absurd hassle and 1 has been prosecuted. I would welcome any explanation or clarification Cyclefree is able to provide as to why that might be the case. I understand she knows far more about this than most of us.
The perception of one rule for the rich and one for the poor on benefits here is palpable, real and frankly irresistible. If even 100 of that 1000 had spent time in custody for their crimes this might have been avoided. And future conduct just might have been influenced.
He doesn't feel the need to wear a stab vest when out and about in Peckham :-)
I just hope the MikeK and other Climate Change Deniers come to realise that the scientific method is aimed at finding out the truth. There will be mistakes made by individual scientists but peer reviewing will find these out. Science unlike politics isn't really something where you can simply rely on belief or opinion.
@SophyRidgeSky: Seems men would receive more paternity pay (£260 a week) under Labour plans than women receive after first 6 weeks https://t.co/YsGJtwPQXn
The other point is that Ed is already wildly unpopular (OGH seems to be just about the only person in the country that wants to see Ed Miliband become Prime Minister) so I guess there's a limit to how unpopular he can get (in Opposition)
As so often, antifrank has hit the nail firmly on the head. Of those who might be influenced by the dead-tree press, the key voter segment in the coming election is that of Conservative defectors to UKIP. They are very likely to be Telegraph and Mail readers.
The whole thing's a joke.
Before that women receive 90% of Average Weekly Earnings.
Typically you just have to follow a link from the library's website, and then use your library card number to log in to the archive's website.
The Daily Mail is the UK's most frequented news website.
53 million visits per month.
Thus they also suffer, as individuals, from well-known psychological biases, such as confirmation bias. Even peer review itself is not a perfect defence, and you will find that papers get published that do not stand the test of time. That is the true test.
If a paper says something new and interesting then it will lead to other scientists trying to build on that work, replicate it or test it from a different angle. One of two things then happens to the paper. It may be found to be contradicted by further work, generating a bit of [relative] excitement in a few conferences, to then be largely forgotten. Or, it will become the Ur-paper of a new micro-branch of its area of science. The paper that all other subsequent papers in that area reference.
One of the frustrating things is that negative results are very hard to get published. So, for example, I tried to apply an analysis method used for one purpose for another closely related purpose - a step hinted at in the original paper, but not followed up on by any subsequent papers. After many months of frustrating work I was eventually forced to conclude that it was not going to work, but of course that meant I had no results to write up in a paper, and so no way to communicate to future scientists that following up on the hint is not worthwhile.
"But they never behaved like this: what has changed?"
Thatcher! (Alanbrooke take note). She encouraged greed and 'get rich quick' with her privatizations and lauding the unacceptable face of capitalism. Inviting the likes of Hanson into her inner circle. She even presided over the corruption of lawyers once as respected as doctors. Now the only professions that have remained unscathed are ones in the public services
Also, appropriating the term "denier" to describe sceptics is utterly inappropriate, and smacks of a [nasty] PR campaign than an attempt to "find truth". It's politicising science, in a process sense.
I write all the above as someone who thinks that AGW is probably happening.
* OK, I made that up. But what proportion of Daily Mail page views are of the opinion pieces? 1%? 0.1%? or less?
http://en.kioskea.net/faq/10002-firefox-block-cookies-for-a-particular-website
@Andrew_ComRes: ATTENTION SINGLE MEN: Almost 1 in 4 women less likely to go on date w/someone who doesn't think climate change needs tackling #showthelove
@Andrew_ComRes: 26% of women less likely to marry someone who doesn't believe climate change needs tackling #showthelove
Doctors working fewer hours for more money, bent coppers, or tax inspectors agreeing advantageous deals with telecommunications companies?